Skip to main content

Positive Phase 3 Results for New Antidepressant


VIENNA, Austria — The new serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (SNRI) levomilnacipran is effective in treating patients with major depressive disorder (MDD), new research suggests.
A phase 3 randomized controlled trial (RCT) of more than 700 adults with MDD showed that those treated for 2 months with 40-mg, 80-mg, or 120-mg daily doses of levomilnacipran sustained release (SR) all showed significantly greater symptom improvements than those who received placebo.
Although the active medication overall was considered "generally well tolerated," common treatment-related adverse events (AEs) included nausea and hyperhidrosis (especially in the 80-mg dose).
Forest Laboratories announced in September that they had submitted a New Drug Application to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for levomilnacipran in the treatment of MDD in adult patients.
"This was one of the pivotal trials done to test the efficacy and safety profile of this drug. And it was one that was submitted to the FDA," coinvestigator Jolan Terner-Rosenthal, PhD, senior medical science liaison at Forest Research Institute in Jersey City, New Jersey, told Medscape Medical News.
Dr. Jolan Terner-Rosenthal
"For depression, there's no one treatment that works for every patient. Our conversations with physicians, psychiatrists, and family practitioners have shown that they need more options. And levomilnacipran is an SNRI that's another option to help patients," added Dr. Terner-Rosenthal.
The study was presented here at the 25th European College of Neuropsychopharmacology (ECNP) Congress.
"One to Watch"
At this year's American Psychiatric Association (APA) annual meeting, the investigators presented several poster studies assessing levomilnacipran, which were commented on by 2 psychiatrists in blogs for Medscape Medical News.
Nassir Ghaemi, MD, professor of psychiatry at Tufts University School of Medicine and director of the Mood Disorders Program at Tufts Medical Center in Boston, Massachusetts, noted in his blog that among "some posters I found of interest" was 1 assessing this medication.
"A new antidepressant seems slated for probable FDA approval for MDD by the end of the year: levomilnacipran SR," he wrote at the time. "Two double-blind placebo-controlled RCTs for acute MDD were effective [and a] clear pattern of any specific side effects of concern was not seen."
Michael Thase, MD, professor of psychiatry at the University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine in Philadelphia, discussed levomilnacipran in his after-meeting video blog posting, titled, "Three Depression Therapies to Watch."
He noted that the antidepressant "closest to being introduced in the United States" is levomilnacipran, making it the fourth entry into the SNRI class of medications.
"I think it's now clear that this is an effective medication. That was established for the parent drug, milnacipran, outside of the United States," said Dr. Thase in his blog.
"I think the thing that distinguishes this from the other members of the SNRI class is that at a low therapeutic dose, the drug is much more of a norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor than a serotonin reuptake inhibitor, making it clearly different from venlafaxine, desvenlafaxine, and duloxetine," he added.
Significant Efficacy
For the current study, the researchers enrolled 724 patients diagnosed with MDD who were between the ages of 18 and 65 years.
The participants were randomly assigned to receive daily for 8 weeks either 40 mg (n = 181; 69% women; mean age, 42 years), 80 mg (n = 181; 62% women; mean age, 41 years), or 120 mg (n = 183; 59% women; mean age, 40 years) of levomilnacipran SR or placebo (n = 179; 61% women; mean age, 41 years). A total of 71% of the patients completed the study.
The primary outcome measure was total score change from baseline to end of treatment on the Montgomery-Ǻsberg Depression Rating Scale–Clinician Rated (MADRS-CR).
Secondary measures included total score change on the Sheehan Disability Scale (SD), safety, and tolerability. Post hoc analyses also assessed single-item changes on the MADRS-CR.
Results showed that compared with the group receiving placebo, significant improvements in MADRS-CR total score changes were found for the groups receiving levomilnacipran SR 40 mg (P = .019), 80 mg (P = .004), and 120 mg (P = .0005).
In addition, significantly greater improvements on the SDS were shown in those receiving levomilnacipran SR 80 mg and 120 mg (both P < .05) compared with placebo. The 120-mg group also showed significantly greater improvements on all 3 of the SDS disability dimensions: work, social life, and family life.
The post hoc analyses showed that all groups receiving levomilnacipran SR had significantly greater improvement on the MADRS item of apparent sadness than those receiving placebo.
Those receiving the 2 higher doses also showed significant improvement in reported sadness and inner tension, and the highest dose group alone showed significant improvement in reduced sleep, difficulty concentrating, and suicidal thoughts.
Adverse Events
Treatment-related AEs occurred in 76%, 83%, and 77% of the patients receiving the 40-mg, 80-mg, and 120-mg doses of levomilnacipran, respectively, and in 64% of the patients receiving placebo.
However, there were more than 3 times as many discontinuations due to AEs in the active medication groups (7% of the 40-mg group, 15% of the 80-mg group, 7% of the 120-mg group) than in the placebo group (2%)
Common adverse events reported from those receiving the active medication included nausea, constipation, heart rate increase, and hyperhidrosis.
Serious AEs were reported by 2 of the patients receiving the 40-mg dose of the active medication (chest pain and deep vein thrombosis in 1 and aggression in the other) and by 1 of the patients receiving the 80-mg dose (cytomegalovirus mononucleosis).
The investigators note that they are pleased with the overall results.
"Levomilnacipran demonstrated significant, dose-proportional improvement in depressive symptoms relative to placebo," they write.
"When you have 30% disability out there due to depression and other psychiatric disorders, anything that can potentially help patients is obviously important," added Dr. Terner-Rosenthal.
A "Me Too" Drug?
However, when asked for comment, Robbert J. Verkes, MD, PhD, from the Unit for Clinical Psychopharmacology in the Department of Psychiatry at the Radboud University Medical Center in Nijmegen, the Netherlands, said he was not that impressed with this medication.
Dr. Robbert Verkes
"This antidepressant is effective. But when you look at the side-effect profile, I think it's a 'me too' drug. And I'm not excited," he told Medscape Medical News.
Dr. Verkes, who was not involved with this research, added that there are already several similar medications out there, and he is not sure there is need for another one.
"If they can show real benefits over the compounds we already have, then that would be interesting. But just being effective isn't really enough."
He further noted that the side effects found are "comparable with drugs we already know," and that he does not believe this is another good tool for the clinician's toolbox.
"I would say, put your efforts into something else, into something that we need. That said, this may be a good drug — and a perfectly adequate 'me too.' "
The study was funded by Forest Laboratories Inc and Pierre Fabre Médicament. Dr. Terner-Rosenthal is an employee of Forest Research Institute. Dr. Verkes has disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
25th European College of Neuropsychopharmacology (ECNP) Congress. Abstract P.2.c.020. Presented October 15, 2012.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Antidepressants Linked to Higher Diabetes Risk in Kids

Pediatric patients who use antidepressants may have an elevated risk for type 2 diabetes, the authors of a new study report. In a retrospective cohort study of more than 119,000 youths 5 to 20 years of age, the risk for incident type 2 diabetes was nearly twice as high among current users of certain types of antidepressants as among former users, Mehmet Burcu, PhD, and colleagues report in an article  published online October 16 in  JAMA Pediatrics . The risk intensified with increasing duration of use, greater cumulative doses, and higher daily doses of these antidepressants. The findings point to a growing need for closer monitoring of these products, including greater balancing of risks and benefits, in the pediatric population, the authors caution. They undertook the study because, despite growing evidence of an association between antidepressant use and an increased risk for type 2 diabetes in adults, similar research in pediatric patients was scarce. "To our know...

Contact Precautions May Have Unintended Consequences

Contact precautions, including gloves, gowns, and isolated rooms, have helped stem the transmission of hospital pathogens but have also had some negative consequences, according to findings from a new study. Healthcare worker (HCWs) visited patients on contact precautions less frequently than other patients and spent less time with those patients when they did visit, report Daniel J. Morgan, MD, from the University of Maryland School of Medicine and the Veterans Affairs (VA) Maryland Health Care System, Baltimore, and colleagues. Moreover, patients on contact precautions also received fewer outside visitors. "Less contact with HCWs suggests that other unintended consequences of contact precautions still exist," Dr. Morgan and coauthors write. "The resulting decrease in HCW contact may lead to increased adverse events and a lower quality of patient care due to less consistent patient monitoring and poorer adherence to standard adverse event prevention methods (such...

Missing Data Lead FDA Panel to Vote Against Rivaroxaban for ACS May 23, 2012 (Updated May 24, 2012) (Silver Spring, Maryland) — The missing data issues plaguing the ATLAS ACS 2 TIMI 51 trial of the factor Xa inhibitor rivaroxaban (Xarelto, Bayer Healthcare/Janssen Pharmaceuticals) have prevented the drug from earning the endorsement of the FDA Cardiovascular and Renal Drugs Advisory Committee. At its May 23 meeting, the panel voted six to four (with one abstention) against recommending that the FDA approve rivaroxaban for reducing the risk of thrombotic cardiovascular events in patients with acute coronary syndrome or unstable angina in combination with aspirin, aspirin plus clopidogrel, or ticlopidine. Janssen's application is based on the results of the ATLAS ACS 2 phase 3 and the ATLAS ACS TIMI 46 phase 2 trial. The placebo-controlled ATLAS ACS 2 showed rivaroxaban reduced the risk of both all-cause and cardiovascular mortality while increasing the risk of bleeding and intracranial hemorrhage, but the studies were hindered by early patient withdrawals and missing data. We Don't Know What We're Missing Based on the ATLAS ACS 2 results, FDA reviewer Dr Karen Hicks recommended approval of rivaroxaban for the requested indications except all-cause mortality. However, another FDA reviewer, Dr Thomas Marciniak, was adamant that the trial results are not interpretable because about 12% of the patients had incomplete follow-up, far higher than the 1% to 1.5% differences in the end-point rates between rivaroxaban and placebo. A total of 1294 subjects discontinued the trial prematurely, and the company was only able to contact 183, of which 177 were confirmed to be alive. Because of the patient dropouts, the company adopted a "modified intention-to-treat analysis," whereby patients were observed for 30 days after randomization or the global end date for the trial, instead of observing all the patients until the end of the trial as the FDA originally suggested. Marciniak criticized the sponsor's efforts to follow the patients and said that three patient deaths not counted in the modified intention-to-treat analysis may just be the "tip of the iceberg." Because the percentage of patients whose ultimate vital status remains unknown is much greater than the reported differences in mortality rates, the claimed mortality benefits are not reliable. The majority of the panel sided with Marciniak. For example, Dr Sanjay Kaul (University of California, Los Angeles) voted "no" because "there was enough uncertainty in the quality and robustness of the data that dissuaded me from voting yes. . . . The 'missingness' of the data doesn't invalidate it, but it certainly makes it hard to infer [the conclusion]." Dr Steven Nissen (Cleveland Clinic, OH) said that the decision to use the modified intention-to-treat analysis had a "profound impact" on the interpretability of the data. "It's saying we don't care what happens after 30 days, [and] that colored the trial in ways we couldn't recover from." Given the risk of major bleeding, "I want to see better evidence that this strategy of adding an Xa inhibitor or a direct thrombin inhibitor or something else to a good antiplatelet agent is robustly better for the patient," Nissen said. He recommends that the companies run a new trial of the 2.5 twice-daily dose of rivaroxaban using a strict intention-to-treat approach, but, he said, "I don't expect the death benefit to be too robust." Several panelists said they were concerned that the patients who dropped out of the trial were disproportionately likely to have a bleeding event, which led them to quit the trial, or a "protopathic" event, as statistician Dr Scott Emerson (University of Washington, Seattle) put it. "We're worried that an impending event is what is changing their behavior. We see that all the time in clinical trials--that regularly measured end points do not pick up [all of] the events," he said. He said that since the company was only able to contact 183 of the over 1200 patients who dropped out, it is possible that the dropouts skew the outcomes comparison of the trial. "Differential event rates after dropout are the number-one thing we're afraid of, so you have to explore it" in a statistical sensitivity analysis of the potential impact of these unknown outcomes. "It would not surprise me if, at the end of the day, these data did not hold up under a proper sensitivity analysis," he said. "What I want to know is, among the people who had events, how differential was the follow-up, but I can tell you by just looking at it, there was a very slightly different amount of follow-up of the people in the treatment arm. But I don't know whether everyone in the treatment arm was cured and they were trekking in the Himalayas and everyone in the placebo arm went home to die. I don't know that that's not the case." Dr Maury Krantz (University of Colorado, Denver) voted in favor of approval but said he does not know how rivaroxaban would perform in general clinical practice, especially when used with aspirin and clopidogrel. "I felt very much torn by this. This isn't a simple paradigm shift. It means going to triple therapy, which is really a three-headed monster in many ways. I think that what you're going to see in practice, if this is not done carefully with the proper labeling and secondary studies, is really dramatic magnification of bleeding and perhaps minimization of the efficacy benefit."

May 23, 2012   (Updated May 24, 2012)  (Silver Spring, Maryland)  —  The missing data issues plaguing the  ATLAS ACS 2 TIMI 51   trial of the factor Xa inhibitor  rivaroxaban  (Xarelto, Bayer Healthcare/Janssen Pharmaceuticals) have prevented the drug from earning the endorsement of the  FDA  Cardiovascular and Renal Drugs Advisory Committee. At its May 23 meeting , the panel voted six to four (with one abstention) against recommending that the FDA approve rivaroxaban for reducing the risk of thrombotic cardiovascular events in patients with acute coronary syndrome or unstable angina in combination with aspirin, aspirin plus  clopidogrel , or  ticlopidine . Janssen's application is based on the results of the ATLAS ACS 2 phase 3 and the  ATLAS ACS TIMI 46   phase 2 trial. The placebo-controlled ATLAS ACS 2 showed rivaroxaban reduced the risk of both all-cause and cardiovascular mortality while increasing the ri...